Variable video game pricing needed, says former EA CEO Riccitiello

Just look at the likes of Clash of Clans and Puzzle & Dragons.

Asking $60 for a console or PC game is a "giant FU to a very large number of people" and a reason why variable pricing should be introduced, former EA CEO John Riccitiello has said.

"Another thing that console and PC guys could and should learn is variable pricing," Riccitiello said at the Gaming Insiders Summit. "$60 is a giant FU to a very large number of people.

"There's not been a console game with even half as many installs as Clash of Clans. Puzzle & Dragons has got more installs than any console game in history. Getting a larger audience through variable pricing is a really useful thing."

Riccitiello also believes the traditional games industry is yet to get games as a service right.

"More than anything, what the traditional game industry should learn from mobile is it's really about service," Riccitiello said. "It's an ongoing business. You'd think we would have learned this some time ago, but I find it interesting that WoW and Sim City and GTA and Starcraft and many other games all fell over at launch when they put their service components together.

"Some of the biggest brands - I'd argue almost all the biggest brands - fell over from lack of the testing and research that mobile people do in the regular course of their day."

2 Comments

User Comments

Riccitiello has been saying this for years, and yet pricing on Origin, a marketplace EA control utterly, has always adhered to the "$60 for every single new game" model.

So either he's insincere, or the realities of either EA as a corporate entity or the marketplace in general prevented him from implementing this strategy. It would be interesting to know which is the case.

While I agree with the sentiment of his statements; Having never heard of either Clash of Clans or Puzzle & Dragons I have to think that they are probably aimed a a completely different market to those of console and PC gamers. My guess is they fall more into the Farmville/Candy Crush crowd than the CoD/GTA crowd. Those already pre-disposed to paying nothing or very little for their gaming experiences.

I do think that games are too expensive, but I hardly think we're likely to get big blockbuster games priced lower than £40. The only way that happens imo is if less money goes into it in the first place. A lot of these success stories of lesser known studios didn't happen because they're better at what they do, they happened because they put more time in without being paid for it. Borne more out of passion than business sense. I doubt publishers have that option, most people want to be paid while they work.